Interesting post Disillusioned. Shame if this is true, HA does seem like it could be a perfect solution for a permanent sculpted augmentation short of custom implants. This info is confusing as I thought the claim for HA was it encourages new bone growth. Some things I have come across mentioned it more as a "scaffolding" structure to encourage new bone growth when used in a hollow, "filling it in". Can it be used extending beyond the surface bone structure (i.e. like an implant, and at what depth)?
Also I had a consultation with Dr. van der Dussen who uses HA direct to permanently mould cheeks and he mentioned he mixes it with something to allow him time to shape it before it sets. I can't remember for certain but maybe it was with Bioalcamid (of which I have read very bad reviews from HIV wasting patients online, another quote found there was: ?Most [permanent] soft tissue fillers have not stood the test of time and thus should still be considered experimental.?
A later consultation with Dr. Daniel Sim?n (maxfac with Facial Team who worked with van der Dussen) said that they reviewed a few patients who had this HA mix and when they investigated the HA area it was still wet (not sure how long after, whether due to complications or not). Just food for thought on the matter, sorry I can't be more certain but maybe someone could clarify some of this